Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Wednesday March 04 2015, @12:07PM   Printer-friendly
from the one-rule-for-them dept.

The NY Times reports that Hillary Rodham Clinton exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state, according to State Department officials. She may have violated federal requirements that officials' correspondence be retained as part of the agency's record.

Clinton did not have a government email address during her four-year tenure at the State Department. Her aides took no actions to have her personal emails preserved on department servers at the time, as required by the Federal Records Act. "It is very difficult to conceive of a scenario — short of nuclear winter — where an agency would be justified in allowing its cabinet-level head officer to solely use a private email communications channel for the conduct of government business," said attorney Jason R. Baron. A spokesman for Clinton defended her use of the personal email account and said she has been complying with the "letter and spirit of the rules."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by takyon on Wednesday March 04 2015, @12:30PM

    by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {}> on Wednesday March 04 2015, @12:30PM (#152987) Journal

    I'm drawn to this paragraph:

    Mr. Merrill, the spokesman for Mrs. Clinton, declined to detail why she had chosen to conduct State Department business from her personal account. He said that because Mrs. Clinton had been sending emails to other State Department officials at their government accounts, she had “every expectation they would be retained.” He did not address emails that Mrs. Clinton may have sent to foreign leaders, people in the private sector or government officials outside the State Department.

    "Every expectation they would be retained". It sounds somewhat reasonable, but what about the intent of Fmr. Sec. of State Clinton and the people emailing her? If it's expected that emails to would be retained, what's stopping dozens of people from around the agency also using personal email accounts and exchanging shady correspondence with Clinton's personal email account? Is it OK if it wasn't official business? If official business was sent from personal-to-personal account, would there be anyway of knowing about it short of subpoenaing the whole email account?

    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 []
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 5, Funny) by Geezer on Wednesday March 04 2015, @12:57PM

    by Geezer (511) on Wednesday March 04 2015, @12:57PM (#152991)

    Sure, just ask the NSA.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Wednesday March 04 2015, @01:02PM

      by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {}> on Wednesday March 04 2015, @01:02PM (#152995) Journal

      If you thought the NSA scraping everybody's traffic was bad, just wait til you see what they don't store!


      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 []
    • (Score: 2) by arslan on Wednesday March 04 2015, @09:57PM

      by arslan (3462) on Wednesday March 04 2015, @09:57PM (#153260)

      Heh, its moderated +5 Funny... but that may actually be a plausible get out of jail card for her...

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Wednesday March 04 2015, @08:21PM

    by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday March 04 2015, @08:21PM (#153220) Journal

    "Every expectation they would be retained".


    This from the same administration which claimed in testimony before congress that there were no backups of Lois Lerner's email [] after her desk computer crashed.

    That server needs to be seized by swat team immediately. Because that is what would happen to you or me.

    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.